The Neural Correlates of Attention Bias and Interpretation Bias in Aggression

The neural correlates of attention bias and interpretation bias in aggression Rebecca Crago Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of East Anglia School of Psychology May 2019 This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that use of any information derived there from must be in accordance with current UK Copyright Law. In addition, any quotation or extract must include full attribution. i Abstract Preferentially allocating attention towards hostile stimuli, and attributing hostile intent towards ambiguous stimuli, is thought to contribute to the aetiology of aggression. Using behavioural and ERP methodology, across five studies, this thesis investigated the neural correlates of attention and interpretation bias within aggression. The first four studies explored attention bias towards angry, happy and neutral stimuli across two stimulus types; words and faces. Behavioural results showed a significant correlation between aggression and increased reaction time to probes replacing hostile words and angry faces. However, this effect was not replicated in the follow up studies for either modality. Overall, the ERP results showed significant effects of congruency (evoked P1/P300 amplitudes differed between probe positions, following the simultaneous presentation of two stimuli) across all studies. However, these effects did not always interact with aggression. Nevertheless, study three indicated that low aggression participants differentiated between angry and neutral faces, whereas, high aggression participants had relatively stable amplitudes. Interestingly, results showed differences in ERP patterns when participants responded to different modalities of stimuli. The findings suggest that angry faces are subject to automatic processing and therefore demand attentional resources. However, hostile words may be subject to slower processing and may not grab attention in the same way as angry faces. The final study used a recognition task to investigate neural correlates of interpretation bias. Behavioural results revealed between-group differences suggesting that aggressive individuals had an increased hostility-related interpretation bias. Largely, the interpretation bias ERP results mirrored those found across the attention bias studies, although processes relating to interpretation bias influence the later LPP component. I believe the original design of the studies presented in this thesis, and the subsequent findings, contribute to the understanding of attention and interpretation biases in aggression. Based on previous results, attention and interpretation theories, and current findings, I consider how cognitive biases may contribute to the maintenance of aggression and make recommendations for future work. ii Table of contents Abstract........................................................................................................ ii Table of contents ........................................................................................ iii List of Tables ................................................................................................ x List of Figures..............................................................................................xi Acknowledgements ...................................................................................xvi 1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 18 2 Literature Review ................................................................................ 21 2.1 Attention Bias ................................................................................ 21 2.1.1 Introduction to attention bias .................................................... 21 2.1.2 Theories of attention bias .......................................................... 22 2.1.3 Assessment of methods for measuring attention bias ............... 23 2.1.4 Attention bias and aggression ................................................... 25 2.1.5 Attention bias to word stimuli .................................................. 32 2.1.6 Attention bias to face stimuli .................................................... 39 2.2 Interpretation Bias .......................................................................... 47 2.2.1 Introduction to interpretation bias............................................. 48 2.2.2 Theoretical explanations of interpretation bias and aggression 48 2.2.3 Assessments of methods for measuring interpretation bias ...... 50 2.2.4 Interpretation bias and aggression ............................................ 52 2.3 Electroencephalography ................................................................. 57 2.3.1 Why use ERP methodology? .................................................... 57 2.3.2 ERP correlates of attention bias in anxiety and depression ...... 60 2.3.3 ERP correlates of aggression .................................................... 64 2.3.4 Theoretical explanations of P300 effects in aggression............ 66 2.3.5 ERP effects of attention bias to words ...................................... 67 2.3.6 ERP effects of attention bias to faces ....................................... 72 2.3.7 ERP effects of interpretation bias ............................................. 76 iii 2.4 Overview of literature .................................................................... 81 2.5 Thesis aims and outline of studies ................................................. 82 3 Study 1 - Attention bias to angry words ............................................ 85 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 85 3.2 Aims and rationale ......................................................................... 88 3.2.1 Research questions and hypotheses .......................................... 90 3.3 Methods .......................................................................................... 91 3.3.1 Power Analysis ......................................................................... 91 3.3.2 Participants................................................................................ 91 3.3.3 Self-report measures ................................................................. 92 3.3.4 Attention bias test ..................................................................... 94 3.3.5 Attention bias test stimuli ......................................................... 96 3.3.6 EEG Acquisition ....................................................................... 97 3.3.7 Procedure .................................................................................. 98 3.3.8 Data analysis plan ..................................................................... 99 3.4 Results .......................................................................................... 102 3.4.1 Data preparation ...................................................................... 102 3.4.2 Descriptive Results ................................................................. 103 3.4.3 Results relating to hypotheses ................................................ 104 3.5 Discussion .................................................................................... 114 3.5.1 Main findings and interpretations ........................................... 114 3.5.2 Limitations and future work ................................................... 119 3.5.3 Contributions .......................................................................... 120 3.5.4 Conclusions ............................................................................. 121 4 Study 2 - Attention bias to angry and happy words ....................... 123 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 123 4.2 Aims and rationale ....................................................................... 129 4.2.1 Research questions and hypotheses ........................................ 130 iv 4.3 Methods ........................................................................................ 134 4.3.1 Power Analysis ....................................................................... 134 4.3.2 Participants.............................................................................. 134 4.3.3 Self-report measures ............................................................... 135 4.3.4 Attention bias test ................................................................... 135 4.3.5 Attention bias test stimuli ....................................................... 136 4.3.6 EEG acquisition ...................................................................... 138 4.3.7 Procedure ................................................................................ 138 4.3.8 Data analysis plan ................................................................... 139 4.4 Results .......................................................................................... 144 4.4.1 Data preparation ...................................................................... 144 4.4.2 Descriptive results................................................................... 145 Results relating to hypotheses ............................................................ 148 4.4.3 Behavioural data ..................................................................... 148 4.4.4 ERP data ................................................................................

Load more